On Jan 5, 2009, at 8:46 AM, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Matthew Lanier <matt at lanier.org>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Rich Morin wrote:
>>>>> Git and GitHub are having an enormous effect on the nature of
>>> the open source development process. The notion of the "core"
>>> committers, for instance, pretty much disappears.
>>>> what is it about this technology that is disruptive to the FOSS
>> development
>> process that has evolved over the last many years?
>>>>> With a centralized SCM you need access control to prevent random
> entities committing junk. With git/distributed SCM where there is no
> centralized repo you simply pull changesets from people you trust (and
> they pull from those they trust etc). Thus the notion and need for a
> "commit bit" disappears.
>>
It seems to me that you may not need a "commit bit", but there's still
a hierarchy of trust going on. Some *one* person still does the
"official" build and they grab commits from a select set of other
people, who do the vetting of code from a still larger set. While
technically Git uses a different model, from a social perspective it's
still the exact same process.
You're still going to have one Pumpking. Or so it seems to me...
-- Mike
______________________________________________________________________________
Mike Friedman | HighWire Press, Stanford Univ | friedman at highwire.stanford.edu